[meta] moving conceptual discussion for policy changes

The recent surge in comment brigades on OPRETURN pull requests has raised concerns within the Bitcoin development community, leading to suggestions for improvements in the process of implementing policy changes. The core issue lies in the fact that a significant portion of the community is not engaged in mailing list discussions. Consequently, when policy changes are announced on platforms like Twitter, it creates a perception among users that it's too late for their input, resulting in feelings of disenfranchisement. This situation often results in a deluge of comments that are hastily written, uninformed, and repetitive. As a remedy, a proposal has been put forward to introduce an intermediary step between the initial mailing list discussion and the final pull request stage. This proposed step would utilize GitHub "discussions" as a platform, either within bitcoin-core/meta or bitcoin/bitcoin repositories.

The idea is to initiate these discussions with comprehensive position statements that outline the advantages and disadvantages, address frequently asked questions, and debunk common myths such as the belief that larger OPRETURNs complicate the running of a full node. To ensure widespread engagement, it has been suggested that these discussions should be titled in a manner that captures attention, thereby encouraging more community members to participate by providing them with a reliable source of information. The ultimate goal is to pave the way for a more informed and serene review process of pull requests, following a period of intense social media activity over the weekend. This approach aims not only to enhance the quality of community feedback but also to foster a more inclusive and well-informed decision-making process regarding policy changes and controversial code alterations. For further details, interested parties can refer to the ongoing discussion at GitHub and the meta-discussion at Bitcoin-Core Meta.